this post was submitted on 04 Jun 2026
327 points (98.8% liked)

World News

56784 readers
1424 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Witchfire@lemmy.world 81 points 3 weeks ago (27 children)

Only predators buy those glasses.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

why do you know the android, zuckerborg is one of epsteins clientele.

[–] smh@slrpnk.net 1 points 3 weeks ago (9 children)

I've heard those sorts of glasses can be handy if you're visually impaired and, say, clothes shopping. You can ask the glasses "hey, do these items match?"

Still creepy in the wild, but there are some valid use cases.

[–] lka1988@sh.itjust.works 18 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (12 children)

Nah. My wife is legally blind without her prosthetics. She's rather stay blind than use these.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] harmbugler@piefed.social 5 points 3 weeks ago

If they could make these glasses more privacy invading by making them useless for the visually impaired, they would.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 5 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

You don't need glasses for that, you could simply use an on-hand camera, maybe a special phone for those with vision problems

[–] smh@slrpnk.net 2 points 3 weeks ago

The glasses seem like a better form factor than a hand-held phone, for the use case where you're out and about and your hands are full, managing a service dog harness and/or cane, and trying to shop.

So, I guess you could mount your special phone for the blind on your chest or waist and have it talk to bone conductive headphones you're wearing. And pick up whatever you'd like described and hold it in front of your chest/waist.

(There's other options, the glasses just seem more convenient because they're on your face.)

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 weeks ago

You could carry a laptop and use it's webcam too

It's down to convenience. I'm already looking at what i'm what i'm trying to film, instead of just recording that, i'm looking at my phone screen to try to record the thing and not even witnessing it in real life. I'm at my kids track meet, any time i'm trying to record him running i'm experiencing it through a 5" amoled screen so i my wife can have a video instead of just being there.

We can figure out how to make them impossible not to notice they're recording. we just need privacy shutters or to have to hold the temple or something.

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Like an automated version of the Be My Eyes app.

[–] benjirenji@slrpnk.net 1 points 3 weeks ago

My wife helps people with this app on a regular basis.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] VitoRobles@lemmy.today 1 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

I support smart glasses. Not from meta or Google or whatever the fuck.

The more cameras we point at cops and people in power, the better.

The moment an open-source privacy focused set of frames exist, I'm buying it.

[–] plz1@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 weeks ago

Now I envision cops just straight up jacking people's Rx glasses under suspicion of being recorded, like they do with phones already.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I agree with your premise, but only if it's stored locally and not sent to a corporation, who is likely going to share videos that help to convict other people of crimes but not allow access to video that shows cops doing something wrong.

But also, there should be a legal requirement to have a light visible when recording. If you're found violating this, it should at least be a sizable criminal offense.

[–] DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

Cop sees the recording light on your glasses. Cop slaps the glasses off your face.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

It should have to light up when recording. Like, at a hardware level.

Surveillance at critical points like arrests seems important in order to have basic accountability. Surveillance all the time if you know it or not is more of a slippery slope.

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 3 points 3 weeks ago

Have a light that beams out from beside the sensor through the same lense, no way to cover it without blocking the camera

Have a visible dot shutter that closes when it's not recording,

Require you to touch the temple on the frame the whole time it's recording.

There are ways

load more comments (24 replies)